Decentralization and corruption

Decentralization and corruption

I refer to the article published in The Jakarta Post on April
8, titled Decentralization in urgent need of major overhaul.

It is sometimes amazing to observe the ills and shortcomings
that are attributed to the current decentralization policy. The
above-mentioned article is another example of this tendency to
argue that decentralization has resulted in widespread corruption
in the regions.

Corruption had been identified as a key problem within
Indonesia's public sector way before the current decentralization
policy was embarked upon. Why should regional administrations be
better (ie. less corrupt) than their role models at national
level? Indeed, by moving a considerable proportion of public
funds to the regions the opportunities for corrupt behavior have
increased at regional level, just as the opportunities for
corruption have decreased at national level. The current systems
of supervision and control are clearly not functioning as well as
they should.

However, they did not succeed in weeding out corruption at the
national level, either. Let's be clear about it: Decentralization
does not cause corruption, it only changes the locations where
corruption occurs. Whether small-scale corruption at the regional
level is easier to eradicate than large-scale corruption at
national level is a matter of debate. However, it seems plausible
that corrupt behavior at regional level is much easier to detect
than its counterpart in the corridors of central government.

Eradication of corruption does not require a major overhaul of
decentralization. It requires a major overhaul of the Indonesian
public sector.

RAINER ROHDEWOHLD, Deputy Leader, Decentralization, Policy Team,
GTZ Support for Decentralization Measures, Ministry of Home Affairs
Jakarta